By Stephen Macaulay
The Wall Street Journal editorial board somehow imagines that the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol is tricking the average American:
“Do Democrats want to unfairly besmirch the entire GOP with the January 6 disgrace, while distracting voters from 8.6% inflation and $5-a-gallon gasoline? Yes.”
Does anyone really think that someone who buys gasoline or food or damn near anything else will not notice the prices because they are so distracted by the hearings? Isn’t this a smear on the cognitive abilities of the average American by the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal?
Or maybe the Journal is concerned that the members of the committee are in some way abrogating their responsibilities in terms of getting things done to address the high gas and grocery prices.
Yes, that 2% of the House of Representatives is undoubtedly hobbling important work.
(Oh, and given that two of the members were elected as Republicans, one of whom has shown herself to be unstinting in her pursuit of the truth, how is it that Democrats are doing the unfair besmirching? And what would be fair besmirching? And were it not for the people who are being besmirched — not “the entire GOP,” unless everyone in the GOP stands with those who are lying or prevaricating about what led to January 6 and even now don’t want to admit the truth (e.g., why won’t Kevin McCarthy admit that the election was fairly contested and lost by Trump?) — there would be no need for the committee.
If the Journal was really concerned about the average American’s pocketbook, then it should be more supportive of the committee’s work.
House senior investigative counsel Amanda Wick has estimated that solicitations from the Trump campaign for things like the “Election Defense Fund” has taken in $250 million dollars, money that might have otherwise been spent by average Americans on things of a legitimate nature, such as the aforementioned gas and groceries.
Instead, it went to things like the Trump Hotel Collection. In that instance, the sum paid was comparatively small -- $204,857 vs. the $1 million that went to something called the Conservative Partnership Institute — but if we go back to the Journal’s concern, know that the $204,857 represents 40,971 gallons of gas at $5 a gallon. Somehow the fuel is far more legitimate rather than raising money to pursue a fantasy. Those F-150s aren’t going to fill themselves up.
The Journal Editorial Board went on to say, “One irony is that the largely Democratic committee’s evidence makes clear that Mr. Trump’s designs on overturning the election were foiled mainly by Republicans, including many in his Administration.”
Nice to see a bit of fact-checking kicked in and there is a glancing acknowledgement of the Republicans on the committee.
But what seems to be somehow overlooked is the fact that Trump, a Republican, had “designs on overturning the election.” That the subverting the will of the people didn’t happen wasn’t because he and his supporters didn’t want it to happen. Yes, there were many Republicans, “including many in his administration” (as though there would be Democrats in his administration), who helped stop him. But Republicans, many brought into his administration, though not necessarily in an official capacity, were fundamental in promulgating what led to January 6. (Eastman, Giuliani, etc.)
“White House lawyers threatened to resign if he fired Justice Department officials who didn’t indulge his fraud theories,” the Journal writes.
It is worth noting that according to The Washington Post the warning about the potential of mass resignations occurred three days before January 6th. What happened between November 4, 2020 and January 3, 2021?
Why there weren’t wholesale resignations among the Republicans that the Journal seems to think are like Caesar’s wife is the real question here.